Headlines

Salena Zito

Relax: Party dominance doesn’t last

Democrats largely prevailed in the 1992 presidential elections; two years later, Republicans crushed them. Democrats won again in 1996 and 1998; the 2000 election was a tie; then Republicans triumphed in 2002 and 2004. Democrats came back in 2006 and 2008; Republicans won in 2010, and Democrats were back in 2012.

Sean Trende, a political scientist and numbers-cruncher at RealClearPolitics, doesn’t buy the idea that Republicans are as bad off today as Democrats were in 2004: “Yes, they lost the presidential election by a similar margin, but Democrats were a minority in the House and well off of their peak in the states.”

Republicans are almost at a postwar high in the House of Representatives, with only 1946 and 2010 resulting in a larger share of the chamber being held by them; the postwar highs also are true if you look at the number of statehouse seats held by the party and its 30 governorships.

“The House numbers are somewhat due to redistricting,” explained Trende. “But even if you assume that redistricting saved the party 20 seats – a very generous assumption – the GOP would find itself only a slight minority in the lower chamber, and well above its postwar average.”

The problem isn’t with whether party dominance is a lasting occurrence. The problem is that when the pendulum swings to the right, we can’t/don’t bother to fix but a small fraction of what is destroyed when it swings to the left.

It’s not how we’ve fared in 2012, but that we’ve had a slow steady march against liberty since 1912. The few bright spots under Coolidge and Reagan have been more than shredded by the dark days when the left has run amok. Eventually we have to hit a tipping point where the nation we have is no longer the one we had. It could be sooner. It could be later. My guess is it happened with the passage of Obamacare, and everything since then is just waiting for it all to finalize itself.

The problem isn’t with whether party dominance is a lasting occurrence. The problem is that when the pendulum swings to the right, we can’t/don’t bother to fix but a small fraction of what is destroyed when it swings to the left.

It’s not how we’ve fared in 2012, but that we’ve had a slow steady march against liberty since 1912. The few bright spots under Coolidge and Reagan have been more than shredded by the dark days when the left has run amok. Eventually we have to hit a tipping point where the nation we have is no longer the one we had. It could be sooner. It could be later. My guess is it happened with the passage of Obamacare, and everything since then is just waiting for it all to finalize itself.

There are so few intelligent libertarians that there effective IQ is about 80.
The problem is that libertarians are incapable of thinking beyond their goal.
We want legal drugs. That there is the end of their thinking on the matter.
We want same sex union recognized by the state. That there is the end of their thinking.

If the libertarians actually joined us, their whole 3% would be nothing compared to the lost 25%. For Republicans that is they could bolster us from their current 3% of the Republican voter to a whole 6% if we got em all. On the other hand, when they drive out the family values voters, we lose can lose up to 50% of the republican voter, me included.

Their end goal though is not more freedom, but a lack of judgement in the people of the nation. Just look at any of their responses to the family values promoters. They actually think WE SHOULD BE ASHAMED FOR PROMOTING MORALLY GOOD THINGS! They actually believe that WE SHOULD BE SHAMED FOR PROMOTING MORALLY GOOD THINGS. They attack us for calling out abhorrent and deviant behavior for being abhorrent and deviant.

Sean Trende, a political scientist and numbers-cruncher at RealClearPolitics, doesn’t buy the idea that Republicans are as bad off today as Democrats were in 2004: “Yes, they lost the presidential election by a similar margin, but Democrats were a minority in the House and well off of their peak in the states.”

The difference here is that Democrats had a compliant media suffering from a particularly nasty case of BDS, so they could spin their obstructionism as stopping that evil monkey Bush from turning us into the Third Reich 2: Electric Bushgaloo. We don’t have the luxury of a sycophantic Fourth Estate.

Take a look at the demographic shift you ignorant nimrod. Why do you think Demoncrats are so hell-bent on another amnesty if not to get a permanent voting bloc?

If the libertarians sided with us wouldn’t it be game over for Dems?

LurkerDood on February 25, 2013 at 10:52 PM

If the libertarians actually joined us, their whole 3% would be nothing compared to the lost 25%. For Republicans that is they could bolster us from their current 3% of the Republican voter to a whole 6% if we got em all. On the other hand, when they drive out the family values voters, we lose can lose up to 50% of the republican voter, me included.

astonerii on February 26, 2013 at 9:26 AM

You’re still right on principle and numbers even though you’re being a bit of a simpleton. Most libertarians really refuse to think beyond “I want pot and hookers legalized”, and I don’t have to care much for you “famblee valyoos” hypocrites to see their way is no better.

Not to mention it drives away anyone who is smart enough to think “is legalizing drugs in a nation with no self-control really such a smart idea?” (it isn’t)

You have to care about the family values voters. If the party does not bring them anything at the table, they will eventually leave and you will be a permanent minority destined to consolidate under the banner Democrat. Once that happens, Americans will be faced with either continuing to support democrat malfeasance and the dead end society that entails or learn the lessons our forebears learned in advance for us and people like you forgot. Either way, those who hold true to the conservative background this nation held out for us will be in a better position to survive and take over where the dead enders end.